Category Archives: Liberalism

Review of Quora: Two Thumbs Down

Just posted this review on the Web.

Curiously it is very similar to another terrible review given by a woman who hates Quora for all the same reasons I do. And she’s a liberal just like me! She also says that anyone who criticizes modern feminism, gays, trannies, or Israel gets slapped with endless penalties and eventual bans. There are also reports that conservatives are regularly banned on Quora. There are also some very disturbing reports that Quora bans those who criticize many huge multinational corporations, Big Pharma, Halliburton, the Pentagon, the NSA, the US Presidency, and a host of other things.

This is extremely disturbing and it shows the potential for a truly nightmarish “liberal” Frankenstein: pro US state, pro US foreign policy, pro Pentagon, pro NSA, pro corporation, pro oil industry, pro Big Pharma radical SJW’s on steroids! Wow, that is a Frankenstein that needs to be shot on sight! Load up your 12 gauge and fire on it til it drops!

This is rightwing DNC corporate Democratic Party + US imperialism + Liberal Interventionism (humanitarian bombers) + corporate liberal + national security state + spy agencies + liberal partroidardism (Democratic Presidents’ foreign policy = 100% good) mixed with radical SJWism, which is everything horrific about the Left. The worst of both worlds! In other words, the world of Hillary Clinton and the DNC!

This horror has been going on for a while. A friend of mine got a university degree recently, and boy I am I glad I got mine in the 1970’s and 1980’s! Even the early 1990’s were not so bad. First there was a large section of Diversity Prerequisites, which was a slate of courses that could have been lumped together into a curriculum called White People Are Evil. However, those teaching the courses were pro-corporate, wild free market neoliberals for “open borders and open markets.” They just wanted to let all the minorities, gays, trannies, and women in on the neoliberal greedfest bonanza. “Free borders and free markets,” which is really just the DNC. This is Corporate Liberalism in its most bald, naked, hideous face.

This is the face of the enemy, people. Corporate liberals are not my friends, and they should not be yours.

I am supposed trade a rightwing corporate liberal project involving radical neoliberal and near Libertarian economics, a pro-corporate and anti-labor view, nightmarish free trade agreements everywhere destroying democracy and establishing corporate rule over state rule, and an evisceration of the safety net for a “Left” corporate liberal project involving complete open borders for the Third World to flood in, anti-White persecution and demonization from the minorities, a sexual deviant/pervert/weirdo/ free for all and probable war on straight men from the “non-straight” freakshow, an evisceration of gender to rival the shredding of the safety net from the “nonbinary” bizarros, and a radical feminist Matriarchy and declaration of war on straight men, especially straight White men.

“Sure, Bob, we know the rightwing project is horrible, but look at all those wonderful Cultural Left goodies you get in return! Give up something to get something. Get with it, Bob!”

Get with what? The rightwing vision I will acquire is softened down Ayn Randism. I am supposed to thank God it’s not the real Ayn Randism while multimillionaires Rahm Emanuel (yearly income: 13 million), Obama, and Hillary (yearly income 27 million) throw me a few crumbs “so I don’t starve” while they cruise by in their limos on their way to their next $300,000 speech at Goldman Sachs (no quid pro quo, mind you).

The Left is an SJW Hell on Earth. As a straight White male, there’s nothing there for me except an all out war on the very idea of being normal combined with Calcutta flooding in from the borders combined with a Feminazi dictatorship combined with a war against me from a bunch of identity groups who have singled me out as their enemy identity to be attacked.

Nothing for me on the Left combined with nothing for me on the Right! Great. A real shit sandwich, in other words. The worst of the Left combined with the worst of the Right. How can you not love that? It’s a veritable anti-Panglossian worst of all possible worlds, an Anti-Candide vision writ large.

Crap. Should be called Queera. The most fanatically pro-gay site on the Net. Wildly pro-gay, pro-tranny, pro every sort of sexual orientation and gender bizarreness, off the charts pro-feminist, just disgusting.

Politically, they are also very liberal, which is good in many ways. I just hate the SJW maniacs, and Quora is SJW Central on the web.

The off the charts SJW insanity is bizarrely combined with wild support for the most reactionary Zionism as the site is flooded with Jews and every post about Israel gets bombed by Jewish Israel-firsters. Most of the liberal Gentiles are also wild Zionists too.

So you get the worst of the Right (fanatical support for reactionary settler-colonial imperialism in Israel) combined with the worst of the Left (celebration of radical feminist misandry along with cheering, promotion and proselytizing for every type of non-straight and non-binary sexual or gender bizarreness out there.

Plus the moderators are the worst church lady, prissy, priggish, sanctimonious, ruler slapping SJW nuns around. You will get constantly reported for homophobia, sexism, racism, anti-Semitism, transphobia and other BS. After a while you get ban threats, temp bans, and then i guess they ghost you.

Great liberal site ruined by SJW fanatics and Zionist maniacs, all tied in the wool liberals like me.

Sad!

DOWN WITH QUORA.

20 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Anti-Semitism, Colonialism, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Economics, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Imperialism, Israel, Jews, Lame Cunts, Left, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Losers, Middle East, Moralfags, Neoliberalism, Open Borders, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Radical Feminists, Regional, Scum, Settler-Colonialism, Sex, Traitors, US Politics, Weirdos, Whites, Zionism

Response to Do Intelligent People Realize That They Are Smarter Than Anyone Else Surrounding Them?

Here is an unpleasant but typical response to my answer from Quora. This is such a typical response or answer that it could nearly be cookie-cutter. The IQ Forum is a great place for savants, geniuses, and other gray matter freakazoids to go on about their beloved secret secret, but sadly, it’s also badly invaded by IQ haters, almost all of them liberals.

You have to wade through endless tiresome pages of liberal screed and screed, of liberal snicker and snark about how IQ means nothing, how the tests don’t measure intelligence, how a high IQ only means you scored well on a test, how everything else in the world is important because IQ isn’t, how really high IQ people never talk about and those who do are not that smart (an American lie), how all of the other eight or 80 or 800 different types of intelligence are just as good as IQ, how everyone needs to shut up about IQ (so why are you in the IQ section?). 

You must wade through eye-drooping yawners such as the endless annoying conflation of intelligence and wisdom (which are not the same thing), the neverending remarks about the obvious, like how intelligence does not equate to success – duh, the repetitive copypastas of very high IQ (160) Stephen Hawking’s painfully retarded remark about IQ, the constant examples of high IQ fools, idiots and failures, over and over, drearily and boringly.

All of the liberal IQ-hating tedium and pablum, tirelessly reiterated and regurgitated like some liberal verbal perpetual motion machine, on and on, the same old liberal same old, the same tired liberal shit, the same snoozing Liberal IQ Denial which is really, let’s face it, Liberal Intelligence Denial.

This post, while perhaps well-intentioned, ironically comes off a bit arrogantly. You seem consumed with how smart you are—navel-gazing, in a way, and feel free to express this only in the safety of an online medium. It smacks of narcissism that you feel is too dangerous to express in the real world. I may have misgauged the tenor of your post but it seems superfluous and states the same thing in more than one way. We get it, you’re incredibly smart.

I also think there’s something fallacious about your conviction: while your IQ may be in the 99.99 percentile, this is only one way of measuring intelligence. Does your IQ mean you could be Beethoven, Steve Jobs, or even a civil rights hero not requiring “objective” genius? Of course not. Only a TINY percentage of the population can achieve those heights and it’s safe to say that IQ is only a small piece of the puzzle. Other factors, not reflected in an IQ test include creativity, emotional intelligence, memory, articulacy and language skills, charisma, and more.

IQ Hatred is the American disease. It’s deeply embedded in our culture.

Sigh. You just can’t escape the liberal IQ bigots, can you? Even on the Quora form IQ section which has been specifically set aside for us high IQ types as nearly the only place in society we can talk about these matters due to attitudes like the commenters, the IQ haters and IQ bigots swarm right into our safe space IQ bar nevertheless and start throwing chairs around and picking fights.

We know. We know we can’t talk about this shit. We know it’s a social faux pas. We know it’s a social violation. Mostly due to prejudiced liberals like the commenter. That’s why we mostly never talk about it, especially in public with folks we do not know well. Alas, even here in the IQ section of Quora, our one tiny safe place on Earth where we can go on and on about our brains, it turns out to be a damned social violation even here.

Narcissism which is kept hidden to yourself and hence invisible to anyone isn’t even narcissism.

Narcissism is NPD – a personality disorder.

Anything less than that is relegated to self-esteem. Narcissism and self-esteem are synonyms. High narcissism just means high self-esteem, and it’s generally seen as a sign of good mental health. Thinking you are hot shit or the cock of the walk or having a high opinion of yourself is not necessarily narcissism. In fact, many such folks have robust mental health.

Vain and conceited people are not necessarily narcissists. Most such folks simply have high self-esteem.

Having a big ego does not necessarily mean narcissism. Most such folks simply have big egos, often because they have been very successful.

I have dealt, usually fleetingly, with some pretty famous people in my life. Like have their own Wikipedia entries famous. Quite a few had huge egos, and arrogance was extremely common. You feel like you are talking to a 20 foot high marble statue staring down its nose at you from above. It’s a very humbling experience. Yet I think most were not narcissists. They just had egos the size of small planets, and often for a good reason.

Narcissists are assholes. All their self-esteem is for themselves, and there’s nothing left over for anybody else. They don’t care about others. They don’t like or love others much. As long as you still love other people and treat them well, you can have an ego the size of Jupiter and not be a narcissist.

The conflation of egotism/self-esteem with narcissism is ubiquitous in US society. Usually the folks doing it are fairly educated. But they all wrong, and many are even projecting.

Once again, “hidden” narcissism isn’t even narcissism because narcissism is pathological and is defined by causing interpersonal difficulties. If nobody can see it, it’s not doing anyone harm.

PS I work in mental health.

Not sure what the commenter’s IQ is, but I wonder if it is in the very high IQ range. I doubt it. Because you see, someone in that range would not have written his post because he doesn’t understand very high IQ people, probably because he is not one. I have met many very high IQ people and observed many others in my life. My whole family is high to very high IQ.

The thing about very high IQ people is that it is quite common for them to be very aware of this fact most of the time. And most of them love to talk about it if you get them alone, contrary to the American lie that if you talk about, you don’t have a high IQ because supposedly high IQ people do not need to talk about it.

Well, maybe they don’t need to, but a lot of them do talk about it, and I will bet you good money they were not lying about their scores.

In fact, it is quite normal for a very high IQ person to talk about it. I have courted and dated a number of very high IQ women, and every one of them loved to talk about this subject. Why not? If you are superior in some way, go ahead and take your pride. You deserve it.

They are extreme outliers in terms of IQ, and like most people with a superior talent, they tend to be a bit obsessed with it, which is normal, and I say good for them.

As IQ rises, it becomes more and more one of the most important things in their lives. Their intelligence is so far above average that they are nearly aliens, and this is jarringly apparent nearly everywhere they go. Their minds are always churning along like a Cray computer and that’s hard to ignore. You are being reminded of your super-brain all the time, every hour, and often more than that. So it ends up being on your mind a good part of the time because your super-brain takes over your world and starts coloring and changing everything about it via its distorted lens.

By the way, navel gazing isn’t narcissism either. It’s called solipsism, and yes, I am solipsistic. A lot of very smart introverts are. Nearly all females are. As you don’t like solipsists, I assume you don’t like females.

Lastly, IQ clearly does not correlate with success. My individual income last year was in the 27% bracket, and that’s the most money I made in my life. Nevertheless, such outcomes are not uncommon for very high IQ people, and as IQ rises above mine past 150 and especially to 160 and up, this problem gets so much worse. A lot of 160+ IQ men are single, celibate, never married, painfully introverted, and living in poverty or near poverty in a single apartment. It’s nearly a typical outcome.

Lastly, IQ is the only measure we have that measures intelligence.It is a test of, more than anything else, pure brain speed.

  • A higher IQ means a faster brain. 
  • It also means a more efficient brain. The higher the IQ, the better your brain utilizes glucose.
  • It also means a larger brain. As IQ rises, so does brain size.
  • Higher IQ also means superior abstract thinking.
  • Higher IQ means better short term and long term memory and also faster and better recall (to contradict the commenter’s statement about no tie between IQ and memory).
  • Very creative people tend to have high IQ’s. The best musicians and artists tend to have high IQ’s. I’ve known a lot of them.

Success in our society is not well correlated with intelligence, as society tends to value a lot of things more than sheer brains. This is the lesson of the commenter’s last paragraph where you discuss things IQ does not measure.

IQ is the only measure of intelligence that we currently have. It’s not that it’s only one of the ways – it’s the only way, period.

The commenter makes the mistake of correlating geniuses – Jobs, Beethoven, MLK – with very high IQ people in the genius category. 1% of the US is in the genius category. That’s 3.3 million geniuses in the US. Not all of them will grow to be the folks the commenter discusses of course. Geniuses like Jobs and Beethoven are very rare. Of course they also tend to be very high IQ, but just because you are one of the 3.3 million does not mean you are like Beethoven.

This is another mistake that Americans often make – conflation of genius in the sense of Mozart or Jobs with genius as an IQ metric = 140 IQ, just a place on the IQ highway. They are not the same, but people like the commenter conflate them all the time for some unfathomable doggoned reason.

Creativity: The most creative people tend to have high IQ’s.

Emotional intelligence: Right. Although EQ and IQ correlate fairly well, many very high IQ people are social retards or especially social failures. And as IQ rises, in fact, social failure, mostly due to sheer weirdness, rises.

Memory: IQ measures memory.

Articulacy and language skills: IQ measures language skills very well, articulatory skills, not much at all.

Charisma: Of course not and in fact as IQ rises into the very high IQ range, charisma drops off dramatically and reverse charisma such as open social failure sets in.

1 Comment

Filed under American, Culture, Intelligence, Liberalism, Narcissism, Personality, Political Science, Psychology, Regional, USA

An Excellent Explanation of Class and Politics in the US White Working Class

Here.

Absolutely  immaculate. I have been observing these things all of my life. It also shows why the White working class or WWC (which really overlaps with the White middle class) hates the poor so much. Why they hate the professional classes so much. Why they love the rich so much. Why they are so frustrated with the bullshit issues of the Cultural Left so much. Why they hate the White Democratic Party elites so much – exemplified by Hillary Clinton. I don’t want to call the Democratic Party elites (DNC) liberals because that’s not what they are – there’s nothing liberal about them.

About how Democratic projects to help the poor with social programs always fail for the WWC and why the WWC resent them so much. About the almost crazy levels of work ethic and workaholism in the WWC. About the extreme level of self-sacrifice and value of decent, moral and thrifty behavior that this class has long exemplified. About the lack of proletarian consciousness in the WWC, their love of the rich, and the desire of so many of them to own their own business (to become bourgeois). About how they don’t just want a job – they want a good job. About why so many of them dislike unions. About why they hate the professional classes – doctors are quacks, lawyers are shysters, professors are idiots and teachers are despised and suspect. All of these are mostly hated as know it all’s who look down on the WWC.

About how white liberal elites sneering at WWC people for being racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and xenophobic arouses such hatred among these people. I mean Hell, I have been Cultural Left my whole life, and in the last 10-20 years, the Cultural Left has gone so bonkers that I of all people am now an evil reactionary Nazi fascist sexist, racist, bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic, transphobic, xenophobic freak. And I am still Cultural Left. I am just Cultural Left from a ways back, just not Cultural Left Full Insanity 2017. If they have this much hatred for a decent liberal like me, consider how much the Cultural Left must hate the real rednecks of the WWC!

About why the WWC hates the poor as shiftless, profligate bums sucking off the public teat while the WWC must work their tail off, gets no benefits, and has to eat beans out of a can.

About how WWC contempt for the shiftless and immoral poor overlaps with racism. Hint: it’s rooted in behavioral differences between the WWC and the non-White underclass. About how pride in America and patriotardism are very deeply rooted in the WWC and about how much they hate liberal upper middle class college students and college educated “traitors to America.” About how much they love cops and hate these same college educated elites for being cop-haters.

About how Donald Trump was the first politician in a long time who actually spoke to these people. About why they love Trump for being a rich man who is contemptuous of professionals and liberal elites. About how much they love Trump’s “straight talk.” About how straight talk is tied into WWC men’s sense of masculinity and their dislike of elite liberal “wussy” men who beat around the bush and don’t give you a straight answer about anything. About how much both male and female WWC people value good, hard masculinity in men and why they see Trump as a real man and elite liberal men as a bunch of wusses. About how they do not want to join the elite upper middle classes that they dislike so much but instead wish to live their same WWC lifestyles but with somewhat more money.

About how the immiseration of this class has humiliated a class that values pride of manhood, family, town, culture and nation so much and takes hits to their pride so hard.  About how this devastating loss of pride and sense of humiliation led not only to the election of Trump but to the current declines in life expectancy among the WWC, and the concurrent epidemics of alcoholism, domestic abuse of various kinds, suicide and opioid use

I will confess straight up. I never liked WWC values, although we inherited some of this as a White middle class family that also always lived in the edge and was constantly in debt. I grew up to never-ending tales of financial woes while living in a very nice White middle class neighborhood that would be considered a wealthy neighborhood full of mansions in most of the world. The White middle class of professionals I grew up with shared many values with the WWC.

My father was a man of endless sacrifice who nearly felt that fun was a sin. But he sure gave a lot of his money to us, though he moaned while he did. There’s a sense of deep generosity in my father that ran concurrently with the nearly masochistic workaholism, priggishness, suspicion of leisure and fun, and value of decent living, thrift, and deeply moral behavior. My father’s values were not that different from the rock-ribbed WWC family’s next door.

I am afraid that commenters and like Trash and Jason Y just do not understand the WWC or even WMC (the overlap) very well. I know these people like the back of my hand, though I do not share their values and honestly I despise a lot of their values as sanctimonious, silly, naive, masochistic, and ultimately reactionary. I never saw why they had to see life as such a hardass, miserable game. I always hated their contempt for the poor, the educated and the professional classes. Their love of the rich is disgusting and repellent. Their lack of proletarian consciousness and adopted bourgeois mindset (if only in fantasy) is infuriating. The contempt for the shiftless, the profligate, the irresponsible, and the hedonists seems vicious and senseless. I do not hate any of these people. Their embrace of the politics of resentment is sickening. Their racism makes me shake my head.

But hey look. They are not changing anytime soon. They are what they are. This is the way they are. This is their culture. It’s not going away, and in fact, it’s getting worse. We must deal with reality as it is, not as we wish it should be as females, SJW’s and other dreamer types are wont to do.

We must deal with the reality of these people and their culture, quit showering abuse on them, and figure out a way to get them to vote for us. We are not going to change their culture. Only they can do that, and I don’t think they want to change. If anything, they want to act even worse.

The first step to dealing with a problem is to define it and understand it in the first place. We must understand these people as they really are, not as our lies and fantasies make them out to be. You can’t get the right answer if you keep asking the wrong questions. We on the Left are not doing any of these things. We are failing to even remotely understand these people in the first place, which means we keep asking the wrong questions. The wrong questions just keep giving you the wrong answers, which is what we keep getting.

I would urge Democrats and liberals to read this article and attempt to deal with these people as they are, not as we wish and dream them to be, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. The response of the Democrats to the anti-SJW backlash has been to double down on the insanity and make everything worse. Like I said, they refuse to even ask the right questions.

And about the true dangers of what might happen when the WWC figures out that voting for Trump didn’t work and instead made things even worse. That’s right – they will go even further rightwing than they already area.

26 Comments

Filed under American, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Democrats, Higher Education, Labor, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics, USA, White Racism, Whites

A Call to All Liberal and Leftist MRA’s: Please Join Us in Building an Anti-Feminist Left!

I submitted a post something like this to a couple of Reddit boards, including Men’s Rights and Masculinism. Masculinism is probably saner. Men’s Rights are MRA’s and most of them are nuts. Men’s Rights buried my post somehow. Masculinism kept it up there, and we will see what the response is, if any. It’s a low-volume group. There’s no way to post on Redpill, and it’s probably a waste of time anyway. Men’s Liberation are some feminist MRA’s. It’s crap. It’s part of the feminist movement, thought I will grant that it’s a bit more sane than feminism. Men’s Liberation started out great. Warren Farrell was one of the founders, but it went full SJW long ago. There’s probably something worthwhile there, but they would never accept a post like this.

Regarding this post:

I believe that the Alt Left should incorporate anti-feminism as a core value. Nevertheless, that statement is an extreme one. I think there are many good things about feminism, but some things are so horrific that they have poisoned the entire movement. In particular, they seem to have morphed into Puritanical, Victorian, prudish, frigid Comstocks who seem out to shut down all heterosexual sex as illegal or a societal transgression.

I am an MRA. In fact, I am an ultra-MRA. Nevertheless, I do not like many things about the MRA movement. In fact, I hate the MRA movement. The MRA’s are almost as bad as the feminists. Nevertheless, the toxicity of modern feminism must be opposed. Mostly I feel like Ryan Englund that the MRA movement is the other side of the mirror of the feminist movement. They are basically the same thing while being opposites of one another. And I am very concerned that the MRA movement is becoming just another Identity Politics rabbithole.

I also, like Warren Farrell, came out of the feminist movement back when it was sane. I was actually a dues-paying member of NOW for a number of years, much to my mother’s pride. I would not join NOW at the moment if you put a gun to my head. I still support liberal feminism, equity feminism, and sex positive feminism. Nevertheless, it is clear that feminism is a clear and present danger to all real men in the West. And as this feminist cancer spreads beyond the West, all men on the planet will soon be menaced.

Yes, we hate feminism, but we are Leftists! Or at least the movement as it started was a Leftist movement. The real Alt Left worth defending has morphed into a Leftist wing and a liberal wing. The rest are just rightwingers, and most are supporting Trump. I have renounced all of them.

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/18/proposal-for-an-alternative-left/

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/dealbreakers-what-the-alternative-left-is-not/

Those are two early foundational documents.

We are a big tent movement with a philosophy of “everyone form your own wing.” That’s not completely true, but what I mean is that except for a small set of non-negotiables, everyone construct your own ideology via picking and choosing the beliefs that suit you best. We are not party line, and we don’t have a lot of litmus tests.

The early founders were straight, masculine men who love sex. Such men either do not exist on the Left anymore or they are being burned at the stake as witches. However, one of our top thinkers is also a gay man. Nevertheless, we do not spend a lot of time on Gay Rights. The Cultural Left has that area pretty much covered. I myself support gay political causes and I even work on them. I am on a number of gay political mailing lists and I work for their causes. A lot of them hate my guts and call me homophobe, but I will continue to work for them no matter how many names they call me. For the most part, gay rights is a matter of doing the right thing. People deserve basic rights whether they like me or not.

We started out as race realists, but most of the movement has rejected that.

Mostly we just think the Cultural Left is out of its head. A lot of us are social conservatives to some extent, but we are not femiservatives and we despise the social conservatism is the US Republican Party. The principal nonnegotiable is on economics. You must be Left on economics! No exceptions! Other than that social conservatism is ok. Some have called us conservative Leftists or socially conservative Leftists. But at least my wing are radical social libertarians.

I came out of the Left. I was a member of the Communist Party USA. I even got a membership card! I used to be on the mailing list for the Weathermen. I bought guns for the Marxist rebels in El Salvador. You get the picture. But a man-hating psychotic feminist Left is something I want no part of.

As a Leftist, I am utterly sickened and disgusted at the reactionary nature of nearly the entire MRA movement. It’s vile and disgusting. We are MRA’s, but we want no part of these ruling class suck-ups. We are for the workers, the working MEN in particular!

Peace out, from a brother to the brotherhood.

I make this post as a call to all lonely MRA liberals and liberals and Leftists wandering in the political wilderness. I call on all of you to come join us to help us build a real anti-feminist, pro-men Left!

5 Comments

Filed under Civil Rights, Conservatism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Masculinism, Political Science, Politics, Radical Feminists, Republicans, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, US Politics

Liberation Theology: Jesus Christ as Marxist Guerrilla in the Jungle with a Machine Gun

From the Sandinistas of Nicaragua to the URNG of Guatemala to the guerrilla column in Honduras led by the Irish Catholic priest in 1983 to Father Aristide’s Lavalas in Haiti to the ELN in Colombia to the Chavistas in Venezuela, all of these radical leftwing groups had one thing in common: they all came out of Liberation Theology, more or less a “Jesus Christ, Marxist guerrilla in the jungle with a machine gun” type of armed to the teeth Catholicism.

Liberation Theology came out a movement of Professors of Pedagogy in Brazil in 1964, especially an influential book written by a priest named Gutierrez. The argument was that teaching in Latin America was an overtly political act, and teachers should ideally by Leftist revolutionaries. Out of this flowed many documents laying out Liberation Theology or “the preferential option for the poor.” It was most powerful among lay workers, of which there are many in Latin America. In heavily Catholic areas, Catholic lay workers are nearly an army.

The French Communist Party in  France long had Catholic roots as did the PCI in Italy. Near the end of his life, Fidel Castro praised Catholicism and said he was a “cultural Catholic.” Hugo Chavez and the Chavistas were of course a ferocious part of the Catholic Left. Chavez Leftism was heavily infused with the social teachings of the Catholic Church.

Even the viciously anti-Christian Sendero Luminoso in Peru had many supporters in the Catholic Church, mostly at the lay and priest level but surprisingly all the way up to the bishop level. Sendero killed many reactionary Protestant missionaries in their war, but they left the priests alone.

The great Edith Lagos, a 19 year old year revolutionary woman who led one of the first Sendero columns, was killed in battle in 1982. Her funeral in Ayacucho at night a bit later attracted 30,000 visitors, nearly the entire population of the town. Everyone was in line for the funeral – the local police, the local government and of course the entire local  Catholic clergy. The line wormed all through the city for hours far into the night. She was treated to an actual Catholic funeral right there in the church led by the local priest. Her casket stood next to the priest as he delivered his sermon. It had a Sendero Communist flag on it.

A communist flag on a coffin in a Catholic church! The crowd then filed out through the town to the graveyard where she was buried in the middle of the night. Her tomb exists to this day, although it has been repeatedly bombed by reactionaries. Local Indians make patronages to the tomb on a regular basis, leaving flowers at it. Rumor has it that she has obtained informal sainthood and is now Saint Edith Lagos in the local Catholic Churches.

FARC called itself officially atheist, although they had the support of many priests in the countryside where the FARC held sway. Nevertheless, most FARC rank and file were Catholics.

In Paraguay, a former guerrilla was elected president. He was also a former Catholic priest.

The armed Marxist Left in Uruguay and Brazil also had deep links to the Catholic Church.

In the US, we have something called Cold War liberals. This is the pathetic Left of the United States,  people who would be rightwingers or center-right anywhere else on Earth.

 

 

 

4 Comments

Filed under Brazil, Caribbean, Catholicism, Central America, Christianity, Colombia, Conservatism, Cuba, Europe, France, Haiti, Honduras, Italy, Latin America, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Regional, Religion, South America, Uruguay, USA, Venezuela

Why There Is No Left in the US: The Pathetic Story of the Cold War Liberals

In Haiti, Father Bertrand Aristide was a Leftist Catholic priest, a follower of Liberation Theology, who ruled the country for years. He won completely free and fair elections with 94% of the vote. He was removed by the Bush Administration which funded an insurgency out of reactionary Dominican Republic to overthrow the state.

Aristide had been reappointed by Bill Clinton after being ousted in a previous coup, but Clinton demanded that Aristide the disband the army and the national police as part of a deal to put him back in power. In this way, Clinton the liberal Democrat assured that Aristide was helpless against the insurgency that invaded from the  Dominican Republic. Now you understand why I hate American liberal Democrats so much. They’re all reactionaries! Yes, they are more Left that the ultra-right Republican Party, but not by much. At best, US Cold War liberals are centrists or the center-right. At worst, they are just another species of conservative.

My own father, a dyed in the wool liberal Democrat and former member of Americans for Democratic Action, one of the most Left parts of the Democratic Party back in the 1950’s, supported both the removal of the Sandinistas and Aristide. My father was a Cold War Liberal. This is as Left as Democrats get in the US, and by world standards, my father was a reactionary!

Bernie Sanders is also a Cold War Liberal. His domestic policies are pretty good, but on foreign affairs, Sanders is a nightmare, just another damned reactionary. In the US, everyone is reactionary on foreign affairs – all of the Republicans and almost all of the Democrats. It’s the bipartisan reactionary consensus – they’re throwing it all down for US imperialism,  come Hell or high water. And this sorry fact makes a good case for the argument that there is no Left in the US –  or none to speak of for that matter.

9 Comments

Filed under Caribbean, Cold War, Conservatism, Democrats, Geopolitics, Haiti, History, Imperialism, Latin America, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, US Politics

Alt Left: “Why I am Not an MRA”

I continue to say that Ryan England is one of our finest Alt Left thinkers. I say that in part because I agree with him so much. I would put him up there with Brandon Adamson, who I also agree with a lot. And both Brandon and Ryan are two of the finest writers, as in prose stylists, in our movement.

I have reputation for being so radical and nuts that I am almost persona non grata in this movement. I know that posts linking to me have been removed from the Alternative Left that Ryan started. Apparently I am “raciss” or something. It takes almost nothing to get called that anymore. Just be a bit honest, and you’re done. I also have a reputation, via Lord Keynes, for being an extremist on the Cultural Left.

It is said that I have some extreme positions on the SJW Left. He is also rather astonished at how socially conservative I am. But I am not a social conservative at all. My views are Democratic Party’s Official Platform 1995. That these views are now seen as just as socially conservative as Roy Moore is quite astonishing, but it shows just how fast the runaway clown car train called the Cultural Left Freakshow has gone in just ~20 years. And indeed I am not just a conservative. I am also a reactionary. I want to roll back the clock – to Democratic Party 1995. That this is considered Troglodytism is one again a symptom of the disease.

Part of the controversy was that I supported Antifa. That makes you almost persona non grata on the Alt Left. It was said that I had moved to the extreme Left. That’s hardly possible as I have always been there. I was on the mailing list for the Weathermen for Chrissakes. After that, I was buying guns for the Marxist rebels in El Salvador. And I haven’t budged since.

The funny thing is that despite my supposed extremism, I find myself agreeing with Ryan England (who is actually himself quite a radical Left type on the Alt Left) a very good part of the time. This post could have been written by me, but I am not eloquent or disciplined enough to have done so, so Ryan had to do it. If you want to know where I stand on the issue of feminism, etc. (I am supposedly an MRA radical) just read this post. I am as MRA as Ryan is. That our mild views are now MRA shows just again just how insane the “normal” has gotten now. Yep, you read that right. Crazy is the new normal. Sane is new bigotry and reaction.

Not going to say much more about this except that I hope it spurs some comments. Like Ryan, I am also a feminist. I came out of the feminist movement back when it meant something. Once again the crazy train left me stranded at the station holding flowers and jilted once again. I still support liberal feminism, sex positive feminism (though if Jezebel is the definition, I have my worries) and equity feminism. I think Ryan might want to identify as a masculinist or Men’s Liberationist. These are the left wings of the MRA movement to the extent that they exist at all. One can be both a masculinist and a feminist and the demands of basic equality nearly mandate it.

I have scarcely seen an article that lays out the poison of modern feminism so eloquently and accurately. Once again, his words are mine. My principal beef with feminism is outlined here by my alter ego, Ryan.

Read and enjoy.

Why I am not an MRA

By Ryan England

Feminism 101

Doesn’t it want to make you swoon?

 

I know I’m going to catch flak for this, but I don’t care much for the men’s rights movement. I do think they make good points – I’ve read Warren Farrell for example and found his work quite profound. In fact, it really takes a wrecking ball to this idea that men have conspired to make the world a wonderful place at the expense of women. You can’t reasonably believe that after reading Farrell’s works.

Why I don’t really relate to the MRM is rooted in my overarching distrust of identity politics. I do think that there’s all kinds of room to criticize the excesses of feminism, and some points made by the MRM are valuable in that regard.  Decades of ideological protectionism has produced a very real feminist echo chamber with next to no external checks on its claims.  The MRM can by helpful in remedying that.  The MRM also brings our attention to real issues that men are confronted with.  Glaring disadvantage (to varying degrees depending on jurisdiction) in divorce settlements and child custody arrangements being the most obvious example.

The feminist demonization of male heterosexuality; this presumption underlying much of feminist theory that male sexual attraction towards women is somehow demeaning and objectifying of women is something else that needs to be challenged and the present taboo against disagreeing with feminism desperately needs to be broken here.  The MRM can help in that regard.  The equation of compliments and polite civil greetings on part of men towards women with harassment, objectification or even oppression, commonly seen on social media, is a manifestation of this.  If taken at all seriously, especially in any kind of public policy context, this kind of thinking could effectively close the door on prospects for male-female encounters of all but the most institutional kind.

The ever expanding definition of rape, and the ever narrowing definitions of consent, and the increasingly onerous requirements for obtaining legal consent – an express verbal “yes” given for every touch, kiss or caress, and even that be nullified if there’s any alcohol or mental illness or any factor that could in the slightest call into question the strict legal capacity to give consent, constitute another manifestation of this.  The end game here, I suspect, is to make legal intercourse, for all intents and purposes, impossible for men.

Although most feminists profess to disagree in principle with the notion that all things “boy meets girl” are inherently sexist or oppressive – and may even trot out their own relationship as proof of this, the restrictions imposed on gender dynamics by these kinds of very popular demands made by very widely circulated and credible media outlets that represent the mainstream of liberal opinion on gender issues, would make establishing even platonic, let along erotic relationships extremely difficult.

That many feminists choose to make exceptions to their own rules for themselves and the men they get the D from should not be taken as proof of feminism’s flexibility and open mindedness.  It should be taken as proof of moral hypocrisy on part of the feminists so doing, and a tacit admission on their part that their system of sexual morality and conduct is no more reasonable and in alignment with human nature than that of the religious conservatives they so smugly see themselves as superior to.

Compound that with inundation of  feminist perspectives casting heterosexual relationships in so consistently negative a light; as being about nothing other than unequal distribution of domestic labor, unequal pay, riven with male insecurity and unreasonable male behaviors contrasted to the relief women are expected to seek and experience in all-female spaces, as characterized by universally poor male sexual performance and an expectation of female preference for marital celibacy, dildos, lesbianism, asexuality, promiscuity, anything other than relational intimacy – all hermetically sealed by a propensity to yell “fragile male ego” at any dissention from any of the above on part of men – as if this kind of petty weaponized rejection is something we should just sit back and relish, and feminist gender dynamics become a mortal threat to healthy heterosexual relationships, even if it turns out to be death by a thousand cuts rather than a swift beheading.

A strong MRM could be a countervailing force for reason and love in gender relations.  On the other hand, groups like MGTOW could just up the ante and make things worse rather than better.  Don’t get me wrong: you, dear reader, be you male or female, have every right as far as I’m concerned to live your life as you see fit, and if that involves not having a significant other of the opposite sex, good luck to you.  I once wanted an unattached life myself.  May you succeed where I failed.

But to advocate widespread rejection of the opposite sex, as feminism often implicitly and, in the case of separatist feminism, explicitly does, and MGTOW likewise does, is to advocate for the infliction of protracted neurosis and frustration culminating in a demographic holocaust upon whichever population is to embrace this as a form of gender based political activism.  It would inflict incalculable and irreparable damage on the psychological fabric of such a society.

But even a less strident form of male activism than MGTOW could end up becoming a gender flipped version of the worst aspects of feminism.  I’ve noticed that in every debate I’ve ever read between feminists and MRAs – though flame war is a better description in just about ever case, since debate implies a reasoned exchange of views and that’s most definitely not what happens – the exchange always boils down to each side saying to the other, “you’re just ugly and can’t get laid” – with cats and mother’s basements figuring in there somehow. Inevitably, one side resigns in frustration over the strident unreasonableness of the other, and both remain more convinced than ever that the opposite sex is hopelessly screwed up.  There’s not much of a future in this.

Taken to their logical conclusions, demands upon heterosexual relationships would end up more closely resembling shari’a law than they would anything previous generations of liberal feminists struggled and fought for.

Wait a minute …

Of course,  feminism – in its more reasonable forms, is still needed to protect and safeguard the rights of women. Life is certainly not all wine and roses for all women at all times, and men are not blameless. This is especially true in communities where, for religious reasons, women still very much are second class citizens.

This is what I find both astounding and disturbing about What looks like an alliance of feminists and Islamists, particularly in opposition to the Trump presidency.  While I don’t condone the more boorish things Trump has said about women, you can’t compare the danger posed to women by macho locker room bluster with the danger posed to women by shari’a law.  Given the dour attitudes that both feminists and Islamists appear to have towards free and fun expression of happiness and attraction between the sexes, however, I can see the kinship the two might have with one another, though from where I sit, it promises to be a stormy relationship.

What I worry about regarding the MRM, though, is its own potential to become a kind of rank gender partisanship. That “Male good female bad” thinking could, and does, easily arise from it.

Because that, in its own way, is exactly what happened to feminism. What began as being “just about equality” or just about “the same treatment of women as for men” has become a blinding and fanatical form of gender partisanship. Motivated by dogmatic adherence to feminism, whole cohorts of young women (and their male sympathizers) have circled the wagons and harnessed collective groupthink to hermetically seal themselves away from any kind of criticism or dissent.

Driven by a sense of universal and historical mission, these women regard themselves as quite entitled to ceaselessly make unilateral demands of men with no countervailing concessions, tar all men with collective responsibility and guilt by association for the very real crimes and misdeeds of some men, and to effectively kill any prospect for intimacy and trust between the sexes by making militant confrontation the permanent and universal norm for gender relations. Backed by unilateral academic and media support and an arsenal of canned responses and copy pasta with which to respond to naysayers, the impact that this has had on gender dynamics is nothing short of devastating.

As an antidote to this, we need to step back from identity politics. We don’t need a male version of the same thing. Given what we should now know about ideological and identitarian polarization, feminism and the MRM will most likely feed off one another and each further radicalize in response to the other. This is certainly what I’ve seen in every single exchange between MRMs and feminists that I’ve ever seen. If that process becomes normalized, it could well mean the death of heterosexual love in its entirety. The prospect of this worries me greatly. I really hope people of both (yes, both) genders can learn to take a step back from their attachments to gender ideology and start reasoning honestly about these kinds of issues.

13 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Democrats, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Islam, Law, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Masculinism, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Radical Feminists, Radical Islam, Religion, Republicans, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics

Go to Hell, Silicon Valley

Silicon Valley is crap.

I just spent five days over there, and I can affirm that it’s definitely crap. If this is the future, then the future is junk. This is it, folks. This is Late Capitalism. This is the dream capitalism of the future. This is the capitalist dream we all love.

But this is crap. Who says this is good? What kind of Homo sapiens thinks this is the right way to live our lives as humans. Silicon Valley is crap. Silicon Valley rents are crap. Silicon Valley politics (NIMBY Libertarianism) is crap. Silicon Valley prices are crap. Silicon Valley housing prices are crap. Silicon Valley workaholism is crap. Silicon Valley groovy liberal CEO’s are crap. Silicon Valley Democratic “progressive” politics is crap. Elon Musk is crap. Four hour a day commutes are crap. 18 hour workdays, 7 days a week are crap. No dating is crap. Silicon Valley $184,000/yr to live a middle class family lifestyle is crap. Silicon Valley no affordable housing for their low wage workers is crap, and even worse, failed crap.

Do you realize that rents are so expensive now that there are tech workers (generally a well-paid occupation) who can’t even afford rent in San Francisco. They reportedly ride the damned buses all night and get their sleep there. It’s legal to do that. They shower at the gym and change their clothes there too I guess. They are living this insane gutter bum lifestyle so they can have a dream job at a Silicon Valley firm, the dream of all American workers.

All Silicon Valley capitalists are union-busters. Elon Musk, God of Silicon Valley, is one of the worst ones of them all. Musk is just a capitalist. All capitalists are crap. They’re all union-busters. Just because Musk and some of the others are better capitalists than the rest of the capitalist ratfucks doesn’t mean he isn’t a ratfuck too. There’s no such thing as a decent capitalist. If you are decent, the competition will eat you alive. If you are decent and you go public, the stockholders will fire you.

When I was on vacation over there, I figured out that in order to spend 1/3 of your income on rent (which is the only sane calculation of rent affordability), in Mountain View, you would have to be making $72,000/year or $6,000/month. That is because a Goddamned one bedroom apartment costs $2,000/month. Silicon Valley is so expensive that even its own policemen, firefighters and schoolteachers can’t even afford to live there. Silicon Valley cities actually build low cost subsidized housing for their own schoolteachers. You know what? That’s crap.

Many people who work in Silicon Valley commute 2-3 hours each way,  often coming from the Central Valley as that is the only place they can find affordable rents. That’s a sick joke. Commuting four hours a day is bullshit. All over the town I was staying in, Mountain View, there were Help Wanted signs in every store for low level positions. They are dying, screaming for workers over there. But there’s no place for those workers to live. On $10/hour minimum wage, all of your income goes for rent on the 1 bedroom.  There’s $0 left for anything else. Silicon Valley has no place for its low wage workers to live! Capitalism fail!

This is the dream. The dream is crap.

Enjoy your late capitalism, idiots.

Capitalism Fail 101.

 

42 Comments

Filed under California, Capitalism, Capitalists, Economics, Labor, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Political Science, Regional, Scum, Social Problems, Sociology, USA, West

Civil War in the Democratic Party

Tulio: I hope this isn’t a disappointment. They called Reagan “the Teflon president” but Trump is Teflon coated with axle grease. I’m desperate to see the Trump admin taken down but this guy has more fucking lives than a cat. The Republican base has gone batshit insane and will defend him to the death.

I’m not sure I believe in the devil, but if one does exist, I’m convinced Trump has made a Faustian pact.

Traditional Republicans willing to challenge Trump risk the ire of the base and being primaried by Bannon-sponsored fascist. The sad thing is even if Trump is gone tomorrow, we’re still left with his base. 80% of Republican voters approve of the president…80%!!!! My worry is that now that the Bannonite strategy worked, the next GOP candidate may be another Trumpian, but perhaps one with more acumen and deft and an ability to do with damage without constantly tripping over his feet.

Crazy times.

Robert, what do you think the Democratic strategy should be going forward? Should the Democrats run hard left in an attempt to energize the base but possibly alienate moderates and frustrated swing voters? Or should they find another Obama type centrist candidate that will appeal to mainstream liberals but also to some heartland swing voters in key states? Just like the GOP, it seems the left is at war with itself and are separating into the Obama/Clinton camp and the Sanders/Warren camp. Where do you stand with regards to the direction we should take from here?

The unique thing about Obama is that he was so broadly appealing. At least at during the first election anyway, he unified both the progressive wing and moderate wings as well as got some moderate swing voters(some of which went for Trump). I see Kamala Harris as possibly being a figure that could unite both wings of the left the way Obama did. I’m not sure how well she would do with heartland swing voters though.

All-out Civil War in the Democratic Party

Yes, I am deep into this war myself. Your average liberal Democrat is a pretty lousy person politically speaking. They aren’t even very liberal! They suck as far as I am concerned. I actually hate most of them. They’re crap.

The Daily Kos is the base of the Democratic Party, and they just gave me a lifetime ban. They are tone deaf and completely brainwashed. I tried discussing the Alt Left with them, but it was like talking to a wall. They kept to their lines about “Alt Left was invented by evil Republicans to smear the Left.” They also talked about how “Alt Left was invented by Hillaryites to smear the Sanders wing of the party.” These are the two “party lines” in the Democratic Party, and Kossacks are not allowed to think outside of their scripted brainwashed lines, so they never do. The brainwash of the base of the Democratic Party is profound and extreme.

However, if you get outside of that bubble and go over to Nation of Change and Alternet, there are some very interesting things going on on the Left. But these people are typically so disgusted with the Democratic Party that they are not part of the party base. They typically say that they hate both parties and won’t vote, but they often vote Democrat anyway. The real Left of the US does not have much of a presence in the Democratic Party,  despite the lies of the Democrats. Yes, there are some of them, but they are not the majority and their presence in the party, even at the base, is rather small.

Most of the base are what might be called liberal Democrats, and they are largely split into Hillaryites and Sandersites. There is a large group of DNC Centrists in the Hillary wing. These people are supporters of Bill Clinton, Obama and later Hillary. However, there has been a shakeup in the DNC, and the DNC organization itself is now in a state of virtual civil war. So far the Hillaryites seem to be winning but not by much. The DNC is now close to 50-50 Sandersites and Hillaryites, with a probable lean towards the Centrists. A Centrist named Perez won the race for the DNC Chair, but his co-chair, Keith Ellison, a Black Muslim from Minnesota, is a Sandersite.

The civil war in the party is extreme. Kos is in a state of all out civil war. Mods have to keep wading into threads to keep the Sandersites and the Hillaryites from murdering each other. The hate is severe and palpable. The Sanders wing hates the Hillary wing, while and the Hillary wing is more resentful than hateful towards the Sanders wing.

The Hillaryites blame the Sandersites for Hillary’s loss in the last election, but that’s not true. They also say that Sanders is not a Democrat, which is true, so they see him as basically a traitor.

The Centrists calling the left wing of the party Alt Left was a clumsy smear to make the Party Left look like leftwing Alt Right types. The Left was also called racist, sexist, fascist, etc. Sanders supporters were called brocialists and accused of being misogynistic. This is an extreme bum rap. None of it is true, but the Hillary wing are SJW’s who hallucinate sexism and racism under every bed they see. Now I think these terms are grossly abused, but I will always defend nonsexists and nonracists against such charges. You cannot possibly make a case of Sandersites being sexist and racist.

For a long time, Sanders was anti-Identity Politics, and he has long been been an Economic Reductionist who has wanted to tone down a lot of the Cultural Left Freakshow. I guess that makes him racist and sexist or something. At any rate, Sanders caved very badly to the SJW’s early on, went full SJW himself and stayed that way for the rest of the campaign.

The Sandersites say that the party has been losing because it has been running too many Centrists, and the Centrists say that anyone running to the Left is doomed to lose, and the party has to go more towards the Center if it wants to win.

 

I believe that the Party Left has a point. It seems when we run these Centrists against conservatives, we lose. These Centrists usually run as, “Hey, vote for me! I’m kind of a conservative too! Just not as crazy as this guy! But I’m no liberal, I’ll tell you that!”

I have no idea exactly what happens, but it seems like the party base stays home in disgust at the Centrist who just insulted them taking their votes for granted. The conservatives say, “He’s still a liberal. He’s just pretending to be conservative. I’d never vote for him anyway” and go ahead and vote for the real conservative.

The moderates look at the race and say, “Hmmm, a fake conservative and a real conservative, what a choice! I think I will pick the real conservative then!”

What Is To Be Done?

Bottom line, I would say we just need to win. If we have to elect these disgusting Centrists to win, so be it. A Hillary Administration and a Hillaryite Democratic Congress would be horrible in many ways, but it would be so much better than a Republican Congress and Trump that there’s no comparison.

People on the Left like me always feel like we are being asked to choose between two shit sandwiches, a Republican one and a Democratic one. The Republican shit sandwich smells so bad you can’t even be in the same room with it. Sure, the Democratic one is gourmet sandwich with the finest ingredients, but at the end of the day it is still a damned shit sandwich no matter how much they fancy it up.

Kamala Harris is not as leftwing as you think. She is not exactly a Sandersite, and she has sucked up to Wall Street terribly and taken so much money from them.

The whole system is sickening, and it makes me want to vomit. I really don’t know what to do. Maybe just say the Hell with all of it and open another beer.

1 Comment

Filed under Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Government, Left, Liberalism, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

PUA/Game: The Ethical Pimp

Here.

The Ethical Pimp: How to Get Ass without Being an Ass, by Tim Mojo Moore.

Nice little ebook. It’s only 63 pages. Since I am such a tight bastard, I read it in part for free instead of forking over the money. Also the author is a little bit of a dick, so I almost did not want to pay him. But mostly I am just cheap and more than that broke as Hell.

I read 13 pages of this book. That’s 20% of it. Based on what I have read, this is actually a good book. I am not sure if it is redpilled. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t. But it’s not bluepilled at all.

Let’s face it, the PUA/Game Sphere is horrific.

Main problem with the Gamesphere? The truth they dish out so brutally is pretty awful, especially from the point of view of a Leftist, liberal, progressive, feminist or woman-loving man. Turns out you were taught a bunch of crap and lies about women. Turns out that most of the advice that women have been giving you all through the years is crap and lies. Turns out that most of what women have been telling you that they want all this time is mostly crap and lies. Turns out even your beloved Mom was wrong. That goes without saying, and men should not listen to their mothers when it comes to women anyway, but it’s still a bit painful if you love your mother like all good men do. And in my case, even my father was wrong.

And the lessons of the Gamesphere plays into a lot of what we were always told was old fashioned sexist lies about women.

The sad truth for all men, and especially for us men who love women, is that the truth about women, what they want, what they do and say, their worldview, and what works and doesn’t work with them is just awful. It’s enough to break your heart.

 

Red Pill and the Gamesphere is utterly horrific, but the tragic and cruel truth is that a lot of the things these awful men are saying are simply true. And if you reject their diabolical advice and try to be the nice leftwing feminist guy, you might just end up with a lot of problems with women. Now all men have women problems with women. The only men who don’t are gay men and dead men. If you have a woman, you have woman problems by definition. You can avoid these problems by being volcel or incel, but that’s no fun.

But there are degrees of this pain. And the idea as a man is to have as much success, fun and happiness with women as possible and as little failure, pain and misery as possible. And if the nice leftwing feminist stuff just leads to a lot of pain and failure with women, maybe you need to check your pointless values at the door and try something that works. If what works in enabling you to have happier, more fun and successful relationships with women is a little bit evil, well so be it. I don’t know about the rest of  you, but I am into success. If I have to be a bit evil to be successful, well I will blame God for that and go right ahead. If being a good guy and doing the right thing leads to failure, what’s the point? You hoping to get an A on your Life Report Card from Jesus? Screw it.

Look, if there is one truism in life, it is this:

  1. Do what works.
  2. Don’t do what doesn’t work.

The world is not a very moral place. Humans are really just mammals, and we are a result of tens of thousands of years of typically vicious Darwinian evolution. You play the game of life with the cards handed out to you by the world. I suppose the key is being as good as you can possibly be and still be successful. If you have to be a bit bad to make it in life, well, fine, but evil is usually best when kept to a minimum.

It is in this vein that this rather vulgar book is written. Tim is trying to show you how to get women without being a what women call a creep. He also doesn’t want you to be a douchebag or an ass. In the lawless Mad Max World of Third Wave Feminism, you are going to get called sexual harasser, sexual assaulter and maybe even rapist if you even try to have sex with women at all, but if  you follow this guy’s advice, you will get called that less and the charges will lose a lot of their bite.

Tim says you can be successful while avoiding all of these rather evil shortcuts men use to get what they want. He calls his formula being a “nice bad boy.”

I like it.

Heterosexual sex, like geopolitics, is a dirty game. Martyrs and choirboys need not apply. You’ve got to do what works. But you can always minimize your assholery along the way.

Carpe diem!

#livedangerously

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 Comments

Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Political Science, Psychology, Radical Feminists, Romantic Relationships, Sex